Mark: <clipped furiously> > Well you are talking a couple of different problems, but most are perception. >Yes you can get good results from a 6mp, but trouble is how a customer perceives the situation. <clip> > Frankly MP is to an extent over rated, but not totally. >Even if its just for a 4x5 print inside they both will have to be down sized to print, by goodness we want that huge file. >With scanning you can scan the slide or negative for the size of the print actually needed. >The best ones would justify a drum scan, and I doubt any digital out there could compete with a top level drum scan of a fine negative. > > The biggest advantage of digital is still speed. In a hurry the customer can have a print in minutes. No way I can ever do that with film. Then again being a film guy could become a new niche market. Hard to say. >Are you going to use a 4x5 chrome and a drum scan to put a product photo on ebay??? nice. Perception - it's like the days when owning a Hasselblad (just owning it, not even *using* it) got you the job. And that huge file they wanted? Not much different from the days when the art director wanted chromes even though the image was destined to be a 2x3 inch dot image in a B&W newspaper! Scanning.. one word - multipass ;) And yup, the biggest + is as you say *speed* problem is though as I've said again and again, speed equates to convenient in the consumers mind, and the words fastand easy usually go hand in hand with CHEAP (argggh NO!) But it's so hard to justify why a photographer with the latest Canon should be paid 10 times what Auntie Myrtle with the same Canon is asking :( Ebay! That is precisely the reason I got a digital camera and is largely the reason I still shoot with one ;) though for images destined for the web, it's also largely digital k
